Yep, if they find a few high and dry Archaic teeth or pinky bones that preserve their original DNA radically new theories will replace the old ones.

]]>By: John Emersonhttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/why-hominin-fossils-matter/#comment-34403
Thu, 30 Jun 2011 13:32:42 +0000http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=12618#comment-34403Nothing changes like the distant past.
]]>By: Eurologisthttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/why-hominin-fossils-matter/#comment-34402
Thu, 30 Jun 2011 10:30:43 +0000http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=12618#comment-34402I don’t want to repeat myself too much, but I have always said a Heidelbergensis (-like) population in Asia ~200,000 to ~150,000 years ago makes a lot of sense from many view points and tool finds. So, I welcome these new dates.

And of course, in the same vein, Denisova likely is Heidelbergensis (-like) – not erectus.

]]>By: Charles Frithhttp://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/06/why-hominin-fossils-matter/#comment-34401
Thu, 30 Jun 2011 09:56:22 +0000http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/?p=12618#comment-34401Science of course often has an agenda and there is no greater agenda than our history. Which is concealed from us though not entirely if we examine the ancient texts.
]]>